What is the trap, by the way. I’m always confused about the steps. It goes:
1. We strike a false peace bargain or otherwise disengage
2. Iran, some coalition of Islamic states, or all of Islam together, somehow, strikes at Israel
4. The US is doomed
I’m not in the habit of thinking of Israel and our national security being one, so help me out. How does Israel being overrun, ceasing to exist, directly threaten us? Not that I want that to happen. They are our allies, and I wish the best for them. But their borders aren’t ours, and I can’t make out how them being their or not makes a difference to the integrity of our country.
None of it makes sense unless I think of it religiously, which I won’t do, or imperialistically. There’s the rub. That’s what stands behind neoconservatism, a way of looking at the world as the Romans or Victorian Brits did, which is “conservative” by virtue of being less leftist than one world socialist universal brotherhood.
I simply can’t think like that. I know it glgas something to do with oil prices, the West’s foothold in the region—because for some reason we need a “presence” everywhere—and the fact that countries dominated by Islam are somehow outside the modern consensus. This is bad, the entire globe not quite thinking the same things, everywhere and all at once. It is supposedly what causes terrorism: our not controlling their minds.
Couldn’t be our very presence pudding them off; couldn’t be us occupying parts of their region, fighting various wars, moving their borders like pieces on a chessboard. Wh in their right mind would complain about that? Except us, endlessly, if they tried one one-hundredth of the intervention over here which we do routinely everywhere in the world.